Test dates could hurt year-round students

By Emily Richmond

Monday, Jan. 19, 2004 | 11:12 a.m.

New testing requirements under the federal No Child Left Behind Act could put students at year-round schools at a disadvantage, state and local education officials say.

The federal act requires schools to test all students annually using a criterion-referenced test, which are based on state and national standards.

Schools that fail to show "adequate yearly progress" for two consecutive years are labeled "needing improvement" and face sanctions. Federal law requires districts to measure "adequate yearly progress" using the tests.

During the last legislative session lawmakers voted to move the statewide CRT test from May to March. The aim was to leave more time to calculate scores and meet federal deadlines for notifying districts and parents of school performance.

But the change in the testing schedule means some students at schools following year-round calendars would have as many as 32 fewer instructional days prior to the tests -- nearly 18 percent of the total academic year of 180 days.

"It's not fair, especially with so much weight being put on these high-stakes tests," said Mary Jo Malloy, a member of Nevadans for Quality Education, recently formed by Clark County parents in the wake of the school funding fight during the last legislative session. "There has to be a way of making this equitable for all students."

Malloy's group predicts the shortfall in instructional days will me lower test scores for year-round schools. That could lead to more of those campuses being identified as "needing improvement" by the state and, in the long run, result in sanctions.

The state's 17 school superintendents have formed a committee to explore possible solutions to the problem, including moving the testing window from 162 days to 120 days.

"We know there's a problem and we're going to address it," Clark County Schools Superintendent Carlos Garcia said. "I agree 100 percent that this needs to be as fair a process as possible."

The disadvantage may be even greater for students in districts other than Clark County, said Gary Waters, president of the Nevada Board of Education. While all Clark County schools begin their academic years at the same time, other districts have schools on scattered schedules, Waters said. That could mean an even greater gap between the number of instructional days students receive before taking the test, Waters said.

It wouldn't be practical to allow individual districts to set their own dates for the CRT because the results need to be collected and tabulated statewide, Waters said. But there should be a way of striking a balance, he said.

"The CRT is only valuable when it's a fair assessment," Waters said. "If we're not testing grade-level skills of students when we think we are, then we need to change that."

Karlene McCormick-Lee, director of assessment and accountability for the school district, said about 22,00 students at the district's 72 year-round elementary schools would be affected, with many having 25 fewer days of classroom instruction at the time the tests are given.

Because this is the first time all of the district schools have been tested at the same time there is no way of knowing whether the year-round schools will actually post lower scores, McCormick-Lee said.

The state will also be closely watching the spring test results for achievement gaps between nine-month and year-round campuses, said Paul LaMarca, director of assessments and program accountability for the Nevada Education Department.

There could be lessons for educators whether the year-round school scores are lower, about the same or even higher than the nine-month school scores, LaMarca said.

"We know there are going to be some differences in the number of instructional days (prior to the test) and it's likely that will mean a disadvantage for year-round schools," LaMarca said. "We're going to do what we can to reduce that deficit, but we also feel the test dates need to be as deep into the spring as possible."